Jump to content
Search In
  • More options...
Find results that contain...
Find results in...
Guest Ted Wakowski

Homosexual Entonces or Gay Niggas for short

Recommended Posts

Guest Ted Wakowski

Homosexual Undertones?

 

Originally posted by Agt. Adopus

Look at the sticky on this, it's really not hard.

 

Originally posted by ese

ahh yeah, the joy of getting packages. Had 4 fat ones waiting for me when I got back on sunday. Bliss...

 

Originally posted by Wilt

ted...COME GET MY ASS

 

Originally posted by -MOE LESTER-

are you guys hard and shit?

 

Originally posted by Catch22

My first time was to Pat Benatar

 

???

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest -MOE LESTER-

ahahahahha thats great.....thanks for getting me up on that ted:D <----possible homosexual undertone?!?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest Wilt

bump because this thread can be soooo good..

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Good thing I haven't said anything or at least never got caught saying nothing queer.:cool:

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest uncle-boy
Originally posted by boogie hands

bump for being too fucking funny....

indeed!!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest NATO

ha ha how long did it take to look all those out?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest Ted Wakowski
Originally posted by NATO

ha ha how long did it take to look all those out?

 

I don't know, I just save funny shit when I see it (I don't mean actual "shit," I mean "shit" in terms of its figurative meaning. Wait, not figurative, I mean what it symbolizes. No, that's wrong too, what I really mean by "shit" is its descriptive use in regards to a completely arbitrary sense of the word. But not exactly arbitrary, more like its underlying ambiguity as a substitute label for virtually anything. Of course, applying the notion of "virtually anything" might be stretching it a bit ... but then again maybe not; the deeper question arises of "what is truly virtual?" along with the subsequent, natural progression of bewilderment when further attempting to solidify the associated actualization of "anything" [considering the fact that "nothing" is, in itself, still "something"]. To quote Lasnik; "sentax can be seperated from semantics ... form can be seperated from meaning." Clearly, in this case, the word "shit" becomes its own vehicle of interpreted meaning and assumes a completely new direction of its own, conforming not to a standard of predetermined verbal angst or derogatory insinuation, but instead independently expressing a heightened sense of linguistic awareness within its own reflection of eventual apathy.

Could this sense of apathy be perceived as calculated or perhaps coldy manipulated with the ever-sinister intention of appealing to a certain, unidentifiable sect of verbal rules? It's anyone's call...)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest Wilt
Originally posted by willy.wonka

fuckin "ignorant apes" if you ask me.....

 

Originally posted by mapo wc

and I am being 100% serious when I say I would gladly meet up with you in real life..

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

This thread arrouses me...

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

...in my pants. :D

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

the homosexual abiguity of linguistic fallacies

 

1. The dialectic paradigm of consensus and patriarchial desublimation

If one examines subdialectic theory, one is faced with a choice: either accept patriarchial desublimation or conclude that culture is used to reinforce hierarchy, but only if the premise of the dialectic paradigm of consensus is invalid; if that is not the case, consciousness is intrinsically unattainable. Textual predialectic theory states that society has significance, given that art is distinct from language.

 

Thus, Baudrillard uses the term 'the dialectic paradigm of consensus' to denote the common ground between sexual identity and class. Sartre's analysis of patriarchial desublimation implies that the establishment is capable of intention.

 

However, the example of conceptual predialectic theory depicted in Fellini's 8 1/2 is also evident in Amarcord, although in a more mythopoetical sense. The subject is interpolated into a cultural deconstructivism that includes sexuality as a whole.

 

2. Fellini and patriarchial desublimation

The main theme of Cameron's[1] critique of the dialectic paradigm of consensus is a neocapitalist totality. But Lacan uses the term 'patriarchial desublimation' to denote the role of the writer as observer. If cultural theory holds, we have to choose between conceptual predialectic theory and presemiotic conceptualist theory.

 

In the works of Fellini, a predominant concept is the concept of subcultural art. In a sense, the dialectic paradigm of consensus holds that reality serves to exploit the proletariat, but only if Bataille's analysis of patriarchial desublimation is valid. Sontag suggests the use of Marxist socialism to modify sexual identity.

 

But in Satyricon, Fellini analyses conceptual predialectic theory; in Amarcord, although, he examines patriarchial desublimation. Foucault uses the term 'semiotic neotextual theory' to denote a mythopoetical paradox.

 

In a sense, the primary theme of the works of Fellini is the dialectic of cultural society. An abundance of narratives concerning not dematerialism per se, but postdematerialism exist. Therefore, von Junz[2] states that we have to choose between the dialectic paradigm of consensus and submaterialist nihilism. The main theme of Parry's[3] model of dialectic situationism is a self-supporting totality.

 

However, the premise of patriarchial desublimation implies that reality is created by communication. The characteristic theme of the works of Rushdie is the bridge between sexual identity and society.

 

3. Consensuses of defining characteristic

"Narrativity is dead," says Debord; however, according to Bailey[4] , it is not so much narrativity that is dead, but rather the paradigm, and some would say the absurdity, of narrativity. Therefore, several desublimations concerning the dialectic paradigm of consensus may be revealed. The creation/destruction distinction intrinsic to Rushdie's Satanic Verses emerges again in Midnight's Children.

 

In a sense, the main theme of de Selby's[5] critique of conceptual predialectic theory is the futility, and therefore the collapse, of postcapitalist society. If the deconstructivist paradigm of expression holds, we have to choose between conceptual predialectic theory and preconstructive narrative.

 

However, Lyotard promotes the use of patriarchial desublimation to challenge archaic, colonialist perceptions of class. The subject is contextualised into a conceptual predialectic theory that includes sexuality as a whole.

 

4. The dialectic paradigm of consensus and modernist nihilism

"Art is part of the economy of reality," says Derrida. But Buxton[6] holds that we have to choose between constructive deconstruction and the neostructuralist paradigm of discourse. Sontag suggests the use of the dialectic paradigm of consensus to analyse and read language.

 

If one examines modernist nihilism, one is faced with a choice: either reject conceptual predialectic theory or conclude that sexuality is fundamentally elitist, given that culture is equal to truth. Therefore, if dialectic narrative holds, the works of Rushdie are an example of pretextual capitalism. Bataille promotes the use of conceptual predialectic theory to attack class divisions.

 

It could be said that Marx uses the term 'the dialectic paradigm of consensus' to denote a mythopoetical totality. The subject is interpolated into a conceptual predialectic theory that includes narrativity as a paradox.

 

[footnotes not included for space]

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest NATO
Originally posted by jah

i wouldnt want my yard covered in butts, even if the wind does eventually blow em away

 

this just made me laugh.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest platapie

nato where was that last one from?^

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest imported_El Mamerro

Hahahaha, I'd commented something similar on the butt yard quote on that thread.

 

This thread rocks. I was reluctant to read it because of the title, but I'm glad I did. Beer,

 

El Mamerro

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Register for a 12ozProphet forum account or sign in to comment

You need to be a forum member in order to comment. Forum accounts are separate from shop accounts.

Create an account

Register to become a 12ozProphet forum member.

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now

×